When two Amendments face off

In the Jan. 22 letter to the ed- itor, “The truth behind gun violence,” the writer, in between the obligatory denunciations of the president, simplifies the whole issue of mass killings; the media is to blame. He writes that the president should issue an executive order to bring back some type of censorship, although not specifying who should be in charge of deciding what is to be censored or what exactly should be censored. Our Supreme Court, the same institution that has upheld his Second Amendment rights, has also upheld the First Amendment right to free speech and expression except in very narrowly defined areas such as child pornography, defamation of character and advocating the overthrow of the government.

I do believe that he is correct in his statement, “Anyone with half a brain knows that the roots of our moral decay promoting gun violence lie in the violent media that produce the top violent movies, video games, gansta rap music, and on and on.” However, our propensity toward violence is much more complex than that. The rest of the free world is exposed to the same movies, video games and music and yet suffers only a fraction of the mindless killings so pervasive in our own country.

The president’s seemingly reasonable proposal to curb violence, especially in our schools, include increased spending to hire more police officers, providing financial aid to schools to develop emergency response plans, starting a national dialogue on mental health issues, tasking the CDC with studying the effects of violent movies and video games regarding violent, anti-social behavior.

In addition the president has asked for bans on assault-style military weapons and armor-piercing bullets, mandatory background checks on all weapons sales with increased penalties for those who purchase weapons for someone who would not pass a background test. Those whose response to banning any type of gun is that criminals will still get those guns are right. However, the perpetrators of our mass killings have overwhelmingly been citizens without any previous criminal record who have used legally purchased weapons to commit their mayhem.

Comments

Robert, you wrote: "However, the perpetrators of our mass killings have overwhelmingly been citizens without any previous criminal record who have used legally purchased weapons to commit their mayhem."

Why isn't it reasonable then to limit access to weapons? I don't challenge your assertion about who and what is committing mayhem, but the notion that law abiding citizens are responsible suggests that perhaps that even some law abiding citizens should not have easy access to firearms.

The literal reading of the second amendment does not exclude felons, does not exclude mentally unstable, does not exclude children.

The point is that the second amendment is flawed if it is viewed as an absolute assertion of rights.

And personally I cring whenever I hear that the second amendment is a "God given right". Who has the authority to make that declaration?

Happybob Once you give up something its GONE! After this is done with . What will OBAMMY want to take away from you next? Your right to free speech, right to own a home, what?. If we let this go as you suggest . We are all losers!

For one thing, law abiding citizens who buy guns sometimes sell them and they aren't very concerned about to whom. Guns aren't picked off trees. They all start as being legally sold and then wind up in the wrong hands "somehow". Well, let's point the finger at the owner who sells them to people who shouldn't have them.

If I lend my gun to someone else shouldn't I feel some sense of responsibility for its use? Stolen guns should always be reported.

Guns found at the scene of a crime. Have you ever wondered how the police are able to trace a gun back to an owner? Turns out that the manufacturer is required to maintain records of the dealer to whom a specific serial numbered gun is transferred. The police can then contact the dealer to find out who that gun was sold to. As long as the atf 4473 is completed this tracing can continue. What breaks that chain is when an owner sells his weapon at a gun show or flea market etc.

All the gun laws & regulations are fine all day long as long as we're dealing with law abiding citizens. Problem is, the lunatics that have committed the worst massacres are not concerned about the law. Or human life for that matter.

RICHMOND, VA—As the Obama Administration signaled its determination to pass through extensive gun control reforms, a local AR-15 assault rifle told reporters Wednesday that it is beginning to fear it might never actually get the chance to kill an innocent human being in the course of its lifetime.“Just the idea that I might actually never get the chance to let loose a torrent of bullets on a roomful of bystanders is inconceivable to me,” the rifle added. “It’s awful. I mean, what else am I supposed to do with my life?”The AR-15 further lamented that gun control advocates’ plan to impose strict background checks on gun sales and restrict firearms access to mentally ill individuals would likely prevent the 5.56 mm, magazine-fed assault rifle from falling into the hands of the type of unhinged individual who would be likely to put the rifle to “[its] intended use” of butchering helpless civilians.“Believe me, if these new laws go into effect, there’s almost zero chance someone like that ever gets their hands on me,” the visibly emotional military-grade armament told reporters. “At best, I’ll probably end up in some responsible gun owner’s basement, spending the rest of my life plugging paper targets at a shooting range until I rust. Not exactly what you’d call a bright future for a precision-engineered killing machine like me.”“Imagine if your life’s dream was suddenly just taken away from you, just like that,” the gun added. “How would you feel?”Though a series of legally obtained firearms have left a staggering body count in recent shootings at Newtown, Aurora, and many other massacre sites, the lightweight assault rifle claimed that its own ambitions are relatively modest.“Honestly, I don’t even need to mow down an entire schoolyard of shrieking children, nothing like that,” the gun explained. “I mean, that would be fantastic, obviously, but at this point I’ll take what I can get. I would be thrilled to take out even one terrified mall shopper. That’s it. Just one. Or two, if possible. Is that really so much to ask?”At press time, the AR-15 was praying that the man in the camo pants currently inspecting him from the other end of the store counter had a history of mental illness.

Ok, HappyBob will lighten up. I don't disagree on Rocky's intent. I hope that he understands that copyrite violation is contrary to the TOS for this forum. I'm sure that the forum moderator would have no problem ... as long as he attributes the writing to it's originator.

I would not say I'm a great fan of dark satire, but it does provide food for thought. In that regard it can be intellectually stimulating. And that's something that I will, without reservation, endorse!